Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think if they did one that was the same, but maybe 1/3 the height, that would look great and let them keep using their investment in the manufacturing process.

I actually expect them to compensate by going more in the other direction.... potentially going back to a top configuration of dual Xeon processors with room for multiple high-end graphics cards. I don't expect them to have slots for Hard Drives, but multiple bays for U.2 SSD drives etc.
 
I actually expect them to compensate by going more in the other direction.... potentially going back to a top configuration of dual Xeon processors with room for multiple high-end graphics cards. I don't expect them to have slots for Hard Drives, but multiple bays for U.2 SSD drives etc.

Wait, for a Mini? Or a new Mac Pro replacement? No, I realize the cylinder design is going to be totally abandoned. They indeed are going to want something that can do dual Xeons and, I would hope, bring back PCIe slots for graphics upgrades.
 
Again, that's fake news. Apple never said they were getting out of display business and that unconfirmed rumor never made sense.
In case you missed my earlier response:

Nilay just confirmed to me that it was an Apple executive that confirmed their previous intentions to exit the standalone display business.

It isn't fake news and never was. They've simply changed their mind.
 
Some people say Apple didn't quit the display business. But what kind of a display business it is when a company makes no displays to sell? It's just dreaming.

Yeah, we have no product but we are still in display business. We'll release a display in two years. Maybe. Meanwhile buy LG or something... But in 2018 you'll see. Or 2019. Our display pipeline is full. CEO is travelling China nonstop and our CDO is making tables... or chairs... not displays, no. But we are in the display business.
 
In case you missed my earlier response:

Nilay just confirmed to me that it was an Apple executive that confirmed their previous intentions to exit the standalone display business.

It isn't fake news and never was. They've simply changed their mind.


I think the person you replied to will probably only be happy if Tim Cook publicly announced that Apple was leaving the display business. Even then, it still may not be good enough....
 
What? you want the Mac Mini internals (small rectangular board) in "an enclosure like the Mac Pro", a cylindrical tube prone to overheating? No!, what you really want is a chassis like the 2013 "cheese-grater" Mac Pro.

Just a user friendly enclosure that makes upgrades simple. Not necessarily the cylinder, but the simplicity of the design. It should look good because it will most likely be sitting on the desktop. In that regard, the current Mac Pro is fine. I like it. I just would never fork over that much for it, even I could afford it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
Just a user friendly enclosure that makes upgrades simple. Not necessarily the cylinder, but the simplicity of the design. It should look good because it will most likely be sitting on the desktop. In that regard, the current Mac Pro is fine. I like it. I just would never fork over that much for it, even I could afford it.

OK, makes perfect sense when you put it that way. I would go one further though, if it was upgradable I couldn't care less how it looked as it would be under my desk.
 
I can't for the life of me understand why Apple chose to go with a 3rd party (LG) for its monitor.

The monitor is the center piece of the work environment. Your window to the world and your interaction. It is the most artistic piece of your computer. To have some 3rd party, black plastic, incongruently designed, and clashing product hooked up to a Mac Pro or Mac Mini seemed so very un-Apple to me.

Of any company out there that could put together and design a gorgeous top end monitor, Apple would be it. They just have to choose to do so.
 
I would love to see this line up of displays.
27" @ 5K
32" @ 8K
To make this perfect, these displays would have matte screens, but I am not holding my breath on that one.

I would love that too, but in all fairness, my little consumer heart would like to see an 8k panel on both models at their respective sizes. 32" @ 8k can pixel double for a 3840 x 2160 workspace and 27" @ 8k can triple for the same 2560 x 1440 workspace as current pixel doubled 5k panels. Would enable 8k playback on either model as well.

Agree, I think 27" with 5K (to run pixel-doubled HiDPI @ 2560x1440) and 32" with 8K (to run pixel-doubled HiDPI @ 3840x2160) would be ideal. I would imagine 32" is about the right size for "looks like 4K" to be a useable UI / text size. I didn't even think about 27" @ pixel-tripled... but I wonder whether the increase in pixel-doubling vs pixel-tripling would be worth the likely massive increase in price to go from 5K to 8K pixels...
 
As it should have been all along, Mac Mini should be an iMac with BYO display. dedicated GPU would be nice too :)
Actually, I would prefer a mapping of

Mac Mini -> headless laptop (i.e. 2 core to 4 core HQ)
Mac (maybe cylinder for heat) -> iMac (i.e. Intel 7700K)
Mac Pro (Xeon / Dual Xeon / PCIe slots)

I cannot buy an iMac.... well I could, but I likely never will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Igloo
Agree, I think 27" with 5K (to run pixel-doubled HiDPI @ 2560x1440) and 32" with 8K (to run pixel-doubled HiDPI @ 3840x2160) would be ideal. I would imagine 32" is about the right size for "looks like 4K" to be a useable UI / text size. I didn't even think about 27" @ pixel-tripled... but I wonder whether the increase in pixel-doubling vs pixel-tripling would be worth the likely massive increase in price to go from 5K to 8K pixels...
Maybe not at first. Assuming it'd be done that way, Apple could pilot into the 8k industry with a ridiculously priced 32" model. Then use margins created by the 32" iMac to start working down the cost of the 32" iMac and introduce a lesser price 27" 8k iMac that, as time goes on, gets cheaper and can eventually replace the 27" 5k iMac.
 
8k? Seriously? I don't understand why people are willing to fork over that kind of money when research has shown that the human eye cannot differetiate resolutions higher than around 5k.
 
8k? Seriously? I don't understand why people are willing to fork over that kind of money when research has shown that the human eye cannot differetiate resolutions higher than around 5k.
They use to say that about 1K, now the research says 5K -- how convenient?

If the picture is moving and you are watching a video then 4K is likely overkill as well (maybe not HDR) -- but if you are editing 8K movies, or pictures of high resolution then both resolution and colour gamit matter, or just the rendering of fonts.... I mean if the eye cannot distinguish.... why did we move to 600 x 600 and 1200 x 1200 printers? Yes the eye can not distinguish a single dot being green/blue/purple/red/black or white.... but it does not mean the overall quality is not discernible....
 
Apple please update Mac mini soon, my family alone needs to buy 3 Mac minis. We all love using Mac mini on our TVs, like a supercharged Apple TV. Everyone who comes over to my house is blown away by how cool it is having a Mac hooked up to my TV is, but it's really showing it's age. The current model is 3 years old and it's actually worse than the 5 year old version so I'm not going to buy something I'll immediately regret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcgurme
This is Apple we're talking about, the company that literally embodies the term all or nothing.

ermm, I may have misunderstood, is it wrong to want a nice user experience while getting the job done (using a Mac) without having to worry about what the silicone parts and various wires are contained in?
 
Isn't the concept of a "high-end" Mac Mini missing the point of the device? It was always supposed to the the cheapest way into the Mac ecosystem (remember Steve Jobs saying "BYOKMAM", Bring Your Own Keyboard Mouse And Monitor)?
Yes. Yes it is. These men make millions and apparently have no idea what they're doing.
 
You're right of course, but if that was the case Apple would still be in the server business "it's a powerful machine, use it as you want"

It's not one-dimensional. I want a prosumer-level headless Mac like the 2012-model quad-core Mac mini I'm typing this on. A prosumer-level iMac isn't going to get my money, because I'd rather spend it on performance than yet another monitor I don't need. Apple's current line-up presumes those who want headless want lobotomized Mac Minis or hyperexpensive Mac Pros and there's nothing but air and vacuum in between. That's just not reality.
 
It's not one-dimensional. I want a prosumer-level headless Mac like the 2012-model quad-core Mac mini I'm typing this on. A prosumer-level iMac isn't going to get my money, because I'd rather spend it on performance than yet another monitor I don't need. Apple's current line-up presumes those who want headless want lobotomized Mac Minis or hyperexpensive Mac Pros and there's nothing but air and vacuum in between. That's just not reality.

I hear you, you have a a powerful machine (you keep saying "prosumer") but I think you just caught Apple on the back foot. Yes you don't need a monitor, so iMac is out of the equation. Mac Pro is overkill for your needs. You want Apple to fulfil a gap that I think they never really wanted to address. Apple is not going to provide a powerful headless computer between a Mini and a Pro. For one brief period of time they made a quad-core Mini (great machine) but then reeled it in because of the iMac. Is this right? I don't know, it's Apple they can do whatever they want.
 
ermm, I may have misunderstood, is it wrong to want a nice user experience while getting the job done (using a Mac) without having to worry about what the silicone parts and various wires are contained in?

Not at all, but there's no chance of Apple releasing anything less than beautiful as we all know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
I hear you, you have a a powerful machine (you keep saying "prosumer") but I think you just caught Apple on the back foot. Yes you don't need a monitor, so iMac is out of the equation. Mac Pro is overkill for your needs. You want Apple to fulfil a gap that I think they never really wanted to address. Apple is not going to provide a powerful headless computer between a Mini and a Pro. For one brief period of time they made a quad-core Mini (great machine) but then reeled it in because of the iMac. Is this right? I don't know, it's Apple they can do whatever they want.
I am pretty sure you are wrong here, by admitting it has pro uses -- I think it was a nod that there will be a high power than the current mac mini option coming fairly soon (which is why they would not elaborate). The Mac Pro -- not soon because they realized the path they were on was a dead end .... too late in the cycle.
 
I think that the 2012 Mac Mini was a pretty decent Mac, and it may have cannibalized some of the iMac sales. Maybe that is why Apple neutered it in 2014, and has ignored it since.
It is a great machine. I just updated my quad i7 this past week with a 1TB SSD and it is like a new machine. I was seriously considering a new Mac. But not anymore.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.